Leaders in FDA Regulatory Solutions
Most regulatory delays trace back to decisions made before FDA was ever in the room: a protocol amendment that closes off a future label claim, a CMC change that triggers comparability that nobody planned for, an indication that a Type B meeting could have reshaped. We embed senior consultants who have lived inside FDA processes — translating evolving guidance into a strategy your scientists, your investors, and the agency can all defend.
Our FDA practice covers the full arc of regulatory decision-making — from the strategy memo that guides your first investor pitch to the post-approval supplement that protects your franchise.
Integrated development plans, target product profiles, accelerated pathway analysis, and independent gap reviews.
Question development, briefing book authoring, meeting rehearsal, and on-the-day support for Type A–D and Advisory Committee meetings.
IND, NDA, BLA, ANDA, 510(k), De Novo, PMA, IDE, Q-submissions, and lifecycle filings — authored, reviewed, or fully managed.
IND-enabling study design, GLP toxicology oversight, DMPK strategy, and CRO selection across small molecule, biologic, and advanced therapy modalities.
Protocol review, endpoint and comparator selection, statistical plan input, and clinical-regulatory issue resolution from Phase 1 to pivotal.
Comparability protocols, process validation, specifications, manufacturing change control, and combination product CMC strategy.
Every program lives or dies by the strategy behind it. We build integrated regulatory plans that map the shortest credible path from your current data package to approval — accounting for indication, modality, available accelerated pathways, and the realistic budget and timeline. When the strategy is already in place, we run an independent gap analysis to surface what FDA will challenge before they do.
FDA meetings are short, infrequent, and high-leverage. A single Type B meeting can re-shape your development program — or quietly close off the regulatory pathway you assumed you had. We prepare your team end to end: formulating the questions, authoring the briefing book, anticipating reviewer pushback, rehearsing your presenters, and supporting the room on the day. You walk in with a position. You walk out with alignment.
From the first IND to a label expansion ten years later, every submission you file lives forever in your product's regulatory history. We author and review the documents FDA reviewers will actually read — quality, nonclinical, clinical, statistical, and labeling — and pressure-test them against current reviewer expectations before they leave your hands. Authored well, a submission anticipates the deficiency letter. Authored poorly, it generates one.
Nonclinical decisions made in IND-enabling studies echo through every later phase. We help sponsors design a fit-for-purpose pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and toxicology program — calibrated to your modality, route, indication, and likely first-in-human design — so you neither under-test (and face an IND hold) nor burn capital on studies FDA never asked for.
The design of your pivotal trial — endpoints, populations, comparators, statistical plan — determines whether your data package will support approval or trigger a refusal-to-file. We work alongside your clinical and biostatistics teams to make sure trial decisions made today won't become NDA issues two years from now. When clinical-regulatory conflicts arise mid-program, we help resolve them without restarting the trial.
Comparability across manufacturing changes, validation strategy for novel modalities, specifications that FDA will and won't accept — these are the questions we help sponsors answer from candidate selection through post-approval lifecycle management. CMC is rarely what teams want to focus on. It's almost always what trips them up.
Beyond core regulatory strategy, we support two adjacent functions where senior expertise tends to be hardest to recruit on a full-time basis.
Submission outcomes are increasingly a function of the workflow behind them. We support sponsors with eCTD publishing, dossier lifecycle management, ESG (Electronic Submissions Gateway) compliance, and the operational infrastructure required to file consistently as your pipeline scales from one program to many.
Combination products and software-enabled devices sit at the most ambiguous edge of FDA regulation. We help sponsors navigate primary mode of action determinations, Center jurisdiction, 21 CFR Part 4 expectations, predicate selection, and the IDE / 510(k) / De Novo / PMA choice — without losing time and capital to the wrong submission type.
Our fractional regulatory leaders include former FDA reviewers, industry chief regulatory officers, and senior consultants with decades of submission and meeting experience across every major therapeutic area. You aren't being staffed with junior consultants under a partner's name — you get the senior practitioner on every call.
Practitioners who have reviewed submissions, chaired meetings, and issued decisions from inside FDA — and who know how reviewers actually read your dossier.
The lead consultant on your engagement is the one doing the work. We don't bait-and-switch with junior staff after the contract is signed.
Our leaders span regulatory, clinical, nonclinical, CMC, and quality — because real-world regulatory problems rarely respect functional boundaries.
Small molecule, biologic, cell & gene, medical device, diagnostic, and digital health — across oncology, rare disease, neuroscience, immunology, and beyond.
Tell us where you are in the development cycle and what you need. We'll match you with a senior regulatory lead and respond within one business day. All inquiries are strictly confidential.
Our team's perspectives on FDA guidance, submission strategy, and the operational realities of regulatory work — coming soon. In the meantime, reach out directly with a question you'd like to see addressed.
What to include — and what to leave out — in a Type B briefing package.
Choosing between Breakthrough, Fast Track, Orphan, and RMAT designations.
What FDA reviewers actually want to see in a comparability protocol.